Wednesday, December 08, 2010

Quote of the Day

"You didn't just do it for fun and you didn't just do it for money. That was the first moose ever murdered for political gain. You knew there'd be a protest from PETA and you knew that would be an opportunity to hate on some people, you witless bully."

-- Aaron Sorkin, figuratively doing to "phony pioneer girl" Sarah Palin what she literally did to a moose this week on her deliriously stupid reality show, Sarah Palin's Alaska

23 comments:

Hunters are issued licenses by the Conservation Department, to track the precise number of deer (A moose is in the deer family) taken from the population, by requiring hunters to mail in their license after they get a deer. Hunters do a public service by controlling the population of animals of prey, such as deer, by keeping it in balance with nature. The fact is that, man has killed off most natural predators in the wild which naturally control the animal of prey populations, and that fact certainly imposes a real danger on people in public.

Lime disease is an example of the danger of letting deer populations go out of control, which they naturally do without hunting. When an out of control deer population runs out of their food supply during the winter, they roam into our communities desperately looking for food, and bring their deer ticks which infect people with Lyme disease, named after the town of Lyme in Connecticut. Another danger of letting deer populations go out of control, is that starving deer are far more likely to run in front of moving cars to cause accidents. Starving deer families are also known to eat the paint off the sides of houses, and then die as a group right on the front lawn, to be found the next morning by people.

Hunters absolutely never wipe out deer. It's impossible. The deer herd will easily replenish its population in full by the next year. Animals of prey are prolific and bear an abundance of offspring. Hunters know this is a natural resource, one that will be conserved for generations to come. That's why it called “Conservation”, it means "wise use". Above all, hunting produces the most delicious food. Think of it like deep sea fishing on land. The fresh meat from hunting is the most delicious food, compared to the frozen meat products we buy at the meat market.

As much as I'd like to agree with the article, I'm not sure I buy the distinction he's making: is there a significant moral difference between being a consumer of an inhumane production process and being the producer?

Palin is stating preemptively that what she's doing is no more culpable that what anyone does who wears leather shoes.

Quite the contrary, there is a difference between what's considered 'necessary', like hunting or raising animals, and eating fish, meat, eggs, poultry, etc., and what is not necessary: killing a moose on camera for televisional and political reasons. (CNNFan, it's not that there aren't that many moose in Alaska, no no. There's a plague of them. But cut the crap about hunters and the balance of nature! Nature doesn't use high-powered rifles with scopes. Nor does it give second chances like she got after she missed.)

Of course, Sorkin's not being coolly philosophical -- he thinks she's a celebritard.

It is true that she often insults the intelligence... I wonder if this show of hers will cut out definitely any chance of her becoming a Republican presidential canadidate?

It was sensationalism. Period. She didn't kill that moose for a greater good and doesn't give a damn about controlling any deer, tick or amoeba population. She knew it would create a stir and that's what she wanted. It's what she thrives on. She's playing the whole "don't. stop. don't stop" game and it's complete and utter b.s.

Daniel: I think the distinction Sorkin is making is between killing for sport and killing for use or need. It's one thing to kill an animal--cow or deer alike--because it's fun and maybe a different thing to kill either of them to fill your freezer or make a coat. Even if one doesn't personally kill the animal for need or use, but merely procures it from another, the moral distinction (if there is one) is between the animal dying for pleasure versus dying for purpose.

(I note the distinction between use and need because one might make the argument that killing an animal for a luxury food versus killing one for subsistence are also different categories. I will make no comment on that point beyond the personal note that I enjoy a good rare steak but can hardly say I need to eat it.)

Regarding Palin's adventures: I am not offended by her killing an animal for sport. However, as one who actually does have family members in the Appalachians for whom bagging a deer and freezing it might actually make a difference in quality of life, I strongly resent a former state governor and Vice-Presidential candidate who lives in what is essentially a mansion with a TV studio attached to it and who receives quite a lot of money from TV appearances, public appearances, book advances, etc. pretending she's as poor and rural and subsistence level as some of my actual family members are and/or have been at times. I've only read recaps and seen clips, but apparently she went on about how her family needs to put a deer in the freezer, which is obvious horseshit, and then she went out and (from what I've seen in the clips) demonstrated she knows about as much about shooting a rifle as I do, possibly less, which frankly seems impossible. I have no doubt whatsoever that some of my Mom's folks would be more than happy to take a tenth of what Fox pays Palin for commentary and sit on the couch watching TV all winter instead of going out in the cold and shivering in a deer stand, and I resent the hell out of Palin for pretending she's just plain folks like them when she's--I didn't want to put it this bluntly, but I can't get away from it: when she's a rich bitch living in her fancy house by the lake with her suits that cost more than some people I know take home in a month.

Benoit, Thanks for your reply. High-powered rifles with scopes dispatch the animal quickly instead of just wounding it for the hunter to have to chase a blood trail for miles until the animal bleeds out. With a high-powered rifle with scope, first and second shots both hit the target in the crosshairs. The second shot as a courtesy, is simply being more humane to the animal. Although two bullet holes may waste more good meat than one.

Lisa, thanks for your comments. It's really much less gamey when it is a fresh kill. My sister who said nearly the same thing you said, nearly ate my whole deer on me while I went into the kitchen. When I returned to the dining room, I was like, "I thought you said you didn't like venison ?!?!" I was in disbelief, I couldn't even get to eat my own deer which I shot and gutted.

She missed more than one shot, which indicates the scope wasn't properly zeroed in before the hunt. She had difficulty working the bolt, which indicates unfamiliarity with her chosen firearm. Caribou seem one of the "easier" animals to hunt in Alaska, which indicates her lack of experience. I came to the conclusion this was a made for media event to burnish her credentials with the rural, white, male sportsman group. If so, she failed miserably. I would believe an experienced hunter would quickly see through her clumsy facade.

At the risk of either needless repetition or justified reprobation: Q. What is the difference between Sarah Palin's mouth and her vagina?A. Only occasionally does something retarded come out of her vagina.

I'm a former network news producer and manager, the media editor at The Daily Banter, and a writer who's been featured in The Huffington Post,The New York Observer and The Village Voice. I'm also the author of a book called Dead Star Twilight and the founder of DXM Media, a firm specializing in television production as well as social media strategies and consulting. On top of all that crap, I'm the co-host of "The Bob & Chez Show" podcast and radio show with Bob Cesca. To find out more about me and/or throw money at me, go here. You can contact me at deusexmalcontent@gmail.com or chez@dxmmedia.com. Follow me on Twitter at @chezpazienza.

A special edition of my full-length memoir, Dead Star Twilight, is now available in e-book format on a pay-what-you-want basis. The downloaded is absolutely free; if you choose to pay for it, just click the "donate" button below the download link. Pay whatever you'd like. Pay nothing. It's your choice.

"As a blogger, Chez Pazienza is filled with outrage, passion and insight -- delivered with a distinctive point of view, a wicked sense of humor, and a two-fisted style of prose. In Dead Star Twilight, he turns all these on himself -- and produces a fierce, funny, disturbing, but ultimately uplifting memoir. This is the book A Million Little Pieces dreamed of being."

"Pazienza could be accused of many things... but he could never be faulted for dumbing us down. His glued-shut prose and bawdy metaphors provide a deeply appreciated, and hilarious, literary diversion."

-- Gelf Magazine, "Insolence Is Bliss," June, 2008

"Snarly, not snarky."

-- Andrew Breitbart

"A delusionally subjective, condescending blog, filled with hostile generalizations and a million exaggerations."

-- Paul Krassner, 60s counter-culture icon

"You're the Antichrist."

-- Mary Elizabeth Williams, Salon.com

"It is truly sad that someone like Mr. Pazienza has a public forum to express his views. In a more civilized time he would, at best, be confined to an institutio­n for the criminally insane or, at the very least, marginaliz­ed from civilized society."